I think this Lens has to be my next buy! extremeinstability what body are you using?

Thanks. Well it was on the rebels I've had(95% of my stuff has been via rebels). Recently switched back to 5D II and just sold it/the 10-22. Had two so far and both were great.

fwiw it's good enough for nat geo. http://press.nationalgeographic.com/2012/08/15/ngm-september-2012/ That was shot with the 10-22 on a T2i. For some reason I always thought maybe some would find that interesting, perhaps more for the rebel aspect(even if it's silly since just the sensor is the most important part for such stuff). Not sure why if Time is taking Iphone shots I guess. Course then there have been some other bigger uses from an original 6mp rebel and its really really really bad kit lens. When looking back at some stuff I feel pretty stupid fretting too much over small lens issues, yet here I am still always doing it anyway.

the Canon 10-22 is likely the best ef-s lens they have made... even though one it was one of the first ..... solid, sharp...accurate, repeatable focus

the 16-35 II on a 5D II was a little better.... but the 10-22 is the best Canon wide for the 1.6 crop cameras

I'm not sure about that. And I mean that literally, I am undecided. I sold the Tokina 11-16 to get this lens and I do miss the Tokina's sharpness. It was, by no small margin, sharper than the 10-22. I also found the 2.8 of the Tokina occasionally handy, yeah not a landscape feature but still, I did use it a couple times for other types of shots. There were two major reasons I switched to the Canon 10-22, the first was that the Tokina is a HORRIBLE HORRIBLE flare monster. I got moon flare from it. Not kidding, moon flare. Bad moon flare. I had intended to do more wide night shooting in urban environments and the Tokina is not up to that. Maybe the new version with coated element(s)? will solve that. The other problem I had the Tokina is that it's as near a prime as a zoom can get. The 10-22 has much better flare control and the zoom range on the is much more versatile. I still haven't got around to that night shooting. Anyway, this post is not to nitpick at either lens but to say that one or the other is a very viable alternative depending on what you shoot and what you want. Now if the 10-22 was as sharp as the Tokina and had a fixed aperture, even f4 would be cool, I wouldn't miss the Tokina for a second.

canon rumors FORUM

some shots here:this first one I could sell exclusively for about US $ 1000 to a transport enterprise here in Switzerland. A newspaper printed it and they saw the pic. As they were searching for something like it, so...;-) Was my last pic after two hours of nightscape shooting...Moonlight over Lake Thun by Peter Hauri, on Flickr

I agree with all the folks who say that this is their favorite crop-body wide lens. Occasionally, I wish I had a little more light gathering, but otherwise, it's a great lens that tends to take very crisp shots.